Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DIPANKAR DATTA, MANMOHAN, JJ.
Gopal Mahto – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar and Another – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 201 of 2025 [Arising Out of SLP (Crl.) No. 11852 of 2024]
Decided On : 15-01-2025
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. The High Court by the impugned judgment and order dated 10th July, 2024 has rejected the appellant’s prayer for bail in anticipation of arrest.
3. We have heard Mr. Raja Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Mr. Azmat Hayat Amanullah, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1-State of Bihar as well as Mr. Avdhesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2-complainant.
4. It appears that the respondent no. 2 lodged a complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the jurisdictional Magistrate alleging offences committed by the appellant punishable under Sections 376, 386 and 511, Indian Penal Code, 1860.1 [IPC] However, the said Magistrate took cognizance of offence under Section 354, IPC.
5. Having regard to the aforesaid development, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant may be enlarged on bail in anticipation of arrest.
6. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned judgment and order.
7. It is directed that in the event of the appellant being arrested, he shall be released on bail by the trial court on terms and conditions to be fixed by the trial court.
8. Needless to observe, the appellant shall not, directly or indirectly, by making inducement, threat or promise, dissuade any person acquainted with the facts of the case from disclosing such facts to the court.
9. We clarify that the observations made in this order and grant of bail to the appellant in anticipation of arrest will not be treated as findings on the merits of the case.
10. The appellant shall, however, diligently participate in the trial and shall not absent himself without just cause.
11. The appeal is, thus, allowed on the aforesaid terms.
12. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
AI
The court granted bail in anticipation of arrest, emphasizing that such a decision does not reflect on the merits of the case.
The court has the discretion to grant anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, based on the circumstances of the case and the need for cooperation in the investiga....
The court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code, emphasizing the need for cooperation in the investigation while addressing the validity of serious allegations.
Bail in anticipation of arrest granted to a septuagenarian accused, emphasizing the necessity of custodial interrogation and the nature of the charges.
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments presented.
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced at the bar.
The court established that continued detention pending trial is unjustified when charges have been framed but the trial has not commenced, warranting the grant of bail.
Anticipatory bail eligibility hinges on compliance with prior court orders and the seriousness of crimes charged.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
